No such thing I'm sure however my main aim is to custom build an eBike to get me to work without breaking a sweat even during a stinky sticky hot Brisbane Summer so I can avoid the whole showering hassle once I get there. The routes I can take on the 12.5km journey into the city include bursts of road but also some very decent runs of dedicated bike path so I'd like to keep the peace with the elite lycra set and just flow along with everyone else as much as possible. Problem is that which ever way I decide to go I have some large hills to climb and after recently building up a cheap & dodgy yet very capable prototype I quickly realised that even the most efficient & effective 200W motor setup will still result in me turning up to work drenched in sweat. Most people sweat standing still here in Summer so this may be an impossibility... but I'm willing to try.

Realising that the law is downright ridiculous for this scenario I'm willing to try to softly break it and just pay the concequences if caught. I see dozens of Lycra clad road cyclists on their 'look-at-me' fancy bikes run red lights on a daily basis (something I consider to be far more dangerous) and they never seem to care or get caught so I can't see why I shouldn't be able to break the law too. I really feel for the law abiding cyclists (Lycra clad or otherwise) who stop at all the red lights and shake their heads in disgust at those other red-light runners. Props to you guys BIG time!

My current cheap & dodgy prototype is based in a 350W Chinese mid-mount kit purchased off eBay. It's a heavy bike (pushing 30kgs) and I'm a heavy guy (93kgs) but I've managed to get it up to 47.5kph on the flat without pedalling at all. Pretty cool I thought but I obviously don't need or even want to do those speeds on my daily commute so apart from building up a fixie with an appropriate gear ratio is there any way I can limit the speed electronically? I've had a fair bit of experience with Radio Control electronics and have used USB programmable ESCs in some of my cars allowing the user to adjust acceleration curves & limit current and all sorts of crazy things. Is there anything similar in the eBike world? Does anyone else have any 'positive' suggestions to the dilemma??

Modest increase in voltage will increase the rotational speed of your motor.Increase the size of the sprocket on the motor and decrease the size of the sprocket on the pedals to turn the increased motor speed into increased power.

If you've been into RC you've prob got some NiMH batteries lying around - you can parallel them to create a pack and then connect it in series to your controller. Just check the ratings of the capacitors in the controller to ensure that you don't take the voltage over their rated limit.

SteveAndBelle wrote:Realising that the law is downright ridiculous for this scenario I'm willing to try to softly break it and just pay the concequences if caught. I see dozens of Lycra clad road cyclists on their 'look-at-me' fancy bikes run red lights on a daily basis (something I consider to be far more dangerous) and they never seem to care or get caught so I can't see why I shouldn't be able to break the law too.

Congratulations. You've just started down a slippery slope. People shoplift all the time too. Why don't you have a crack at that while you're at it? "Oh, look he got away wth being stupid. Cool, I can be stupid too!"

If this is your thinking process, it is unsurprising that you are overweight.

The whole point of having a bike is to build exercise into daily activity, not get you out of it. Getting exercise necessarily involves getting sweaty, either a little or a lot. Even walking gets you sweaty. If you want to avoid that, get a motorbike... but don't complain that you look like the Michelin Man, your heart is weak and your arteries are clogged, because you made the choices that got you there.

Choices have consequences. You don't get to choose those consequences, that's not the way it works. So make your choices wisely.

Above post seems a bit harsh, but is a valid truth. Why do you want to buy a bike you don't have to pedal?... Buy a 50cc scooter... Electric bikes are silly, and breaking the (agreeably ridicules) laws in order to pump out that little bit more when you can just buy a vehicle purpose made for riding with an engine seems somewhat futile.

SteveAndBelle wrote: It's a heavy bike (pushing 30kgs) and I'm a heavy guy (93kgs) but I've managed to get it up to 47.5kph on the flat without pedalling at all. Pretty cool... ?

Yeah right, 123 kg x 47.5 kph hitting a 60 kg pedestrian. Have you thought about the consequences ? Frankly, I wouldn't want you to hit my car either. At the very least, you'll be blasting up hills behind other cyclists at speeds nobody else is expecting, and that too adds to the threats you present. And even on the road, motorists who have trouble seeing motor-cyclists will be more likely to miss the unusual behaviors you're e-biking presents.

The law is not ridiculous, it's intended to protect other road users from people who think of only their interests. Not sure what the fines are in Brisbane for riding an unlicensed, uninsured, unregistered motor vehicle (in NSW it totes up to around $1300), but if you were regularly commuting on one of my cycle routes, I'd be asking the local plods to deal with you.

edit: fixed quote

Last edited by wombatK on Mon Oct 31, 2011 8:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

WombatK

Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us -Jerry Garcia

wombatK wrote:The law is not ridiculous, it's intended to protect other road users from people who think of only their interests. Not sure what the fines are in Brisbane for riding an unlicensed, uninsured, unregistered motor vehicle (in NSW it totes up to around $1300), but if you were regularly commuting on one of my cycle routes, I'd be asking the local plods to deal with you.

+1.

If you prefer not to pedal, but still want to beat the traffic, do it properly: get licenced and insured and get a motorbike.

You got roasted because you wanted us to help you with taking illegal shortcuts that put other people at risk with no recourse.

wombatK wrote:The law is not ridiculous, it's intended to protect other road users from people who think of only their interests. Not sure what the fines are in Brisbane for riding an unlicensed, uninsured, unregistered motor vehicle (in NSW it totes up to around $1300), but if you were regularly commuting on one of my cycle routes, I'd be asking the local plods to deal with you.

+1.

If you prefer not to pedal, but still want to beat the traffic, do it properly: get licenced and insured and get a motorbike.

You got roasted because you wanted us to help you with taking illegal shortcuts that put other people at risk with no recourse.

+1, the law is the law whether you like it or not.

When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.

very harsh and unfriendly way to treat a new posterFirstly just because he weighs 93 kg does not automatically mean that he is a fat overweight person with clogged arteries who is trying to avoid exerciseSecondly my impression is that he wanted more wattage to avoid excessive sweating, not become a lethal missile and endanger the holier than thou whippets who can cruise at 35kph without breaking a sweat.I welcome anyone getting out of a petrol fueled vehicle and on to a bike, just because I can get by without battery assistance i dont think we should be discriminating against those who cant or dont want to, perhaps people who start cycling this way eventually become fit enough not to need assistanceperhaps the OP could buy a really light bike,put a 200w motor on it, loose a few kg and blow past a few negative posters

Hmmm. I really think the thread title and the first few words of the OP say all that needs to be said.

Legal & effortless eBike...

No such thing I'm sure ...

Just trolling around.

Joe

To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracyBertrand RussellMany people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.

I'm not sure how that's relevant. The difference as I see it as that whilst there may have been attempts to ban bicycles previously (regardless of the reasoning) this law is already in place, and the OP knows that and acknowledges it. And the point already made, there are already (effortless) alternatives currently available. If I wish to go someplace in a hurry without raising a sweat, I ride my (petrol fueled) motorcycle. When the appropriate time comes, I'll get rid of it and buy an electric motorcycle, paying the licences, registration, insurance etc, which I feel are quite justified on a number of levels, while still keeping my electrike(s).

Joe

To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracyBertrand RussellMany people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.

the point i was trying to make was, at the time when most people had horses, it seemed sensible to ban bicycles if they would upset horses, some want Ebikes banned now, yet in the future when everyone is whizzing around on all sorts of electric and other devices, limiting an ebike to 200w will seem archaic imo

I actually agree with the reasoning, and put in its context, it did make limited sense. And in fact even today, when I'm riding my petrol motorcycle, and I come upon (as I sometimes do living in a semi rural area) a horse or horses, just to be on the safe side, wherever possible, I'll clutch in and throttle down to minimise any chance of spooking the horses. But in that case it's not the motorcycle that's the problem ... it's the horse.

However, here it's the over-powered e-bike causes the problems. As mentioned previously, one of those travelling at high speed on a cycle path is a recipe for disaster.

But more to the point, my initial comment brings me here. This e-bike sub-forum (at the time of my writing this post) has 64 threads. Of those, excluding THIS thread, three of them have titles which show they are discussing law in one form or another. (From personal experience, I know there is also discussion on law in several others, but I'll discount those.) However, these three threads between them contain 398 of the total of 968 postings in this forum (again, at the time of posting this). So that's roughly 40% of the sub-forum posts are about the law and e-bikes.

Again, from personal experience, I know there are many posts on exactly this topic, over powered ("illegal") e-bikes.

Now has the OP bothered to read any of those threads? It would seem not. Otherwise it would have been immediately obvious that this particular topic has been thrashed and thrashed and thrashed.

So what end does yet another thread on the same topic serve? None that I can see.

Joe

To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracyBertrand RussellMany people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.

toofat wrote:the point i was trying to make was, at the time when most people had horses, it seemed sensible to ban bicycles if they would upset horses, some want Ebikes banned now, yet in the future when everyone is whizzing around on all sorts of electric and other devices, limiting an ebike to 200w will seem archaic imo

Even if that were to be true, if "everyone is whizzing around on all sorts of electric and other devices", they will be on the roads - not on bike paths...

Hmmm... an ebike that can do 47.5k on the flat without pedalling???? And people wonder why I like electric bikes to be limited. **sigh**

I hope the op realises that most 50cc petrol scooters are only good for that? I believe most of them are limited to 50. Personally if I saw that contraption being used I wouldn't wait till I got home to call the cops... I'd pop into the station on the way home!

I think the best place for a question like this is on the electric bike forums at http://www.endless-sphere.com because there's far too many self righteous wanchors here who take pride in their place at the middle of the human powered totem pole.

What makes me really laugh are the comments on 'illegality'. How many of the pious pedallers here have reflectors on their wheels? How many have refelctors on their pedals, or a white reflector on the front of their bike and a red one on the rear,? How many use the appropriate hand signals when changing lanes or diverging? How many discard their helmet when it has reached its use-by-date? How many have a bell fitted to their bike? How many ride no more than two abreast on the road? How many have their front brake lever on the left? How many are over 93kgs (most of the 6'3"+ riders would be) and finally how many have ridden at speeds above 47.5 kph using the assistance of a tailwind, a slipstream, a hill or a Guarana energy gel?

A: about 95% of us. (Hypocrite much?). Are you a menace to society too or did you earn the right to be so pious by cycling to work in the rain when others took the car?

Talk about an elitist buch of hypocrite wanchors who cherry pick the laws they follow. Even so, these aren't the laws allegedly found by Moses etched into the stone tablets, they're usually ill conceived scribble made by people who won a popularity contest by lying and cheating and who have no idea what they're talking about in the first place. That's why you took the dodgy reflectors off your clipless pedals isn't it. Yes, hang your heads in shame and report to your local Police Station forthwith.

Cycling is a growing sport and most, if not all of the newer members of the cycling community can't match your V02 and can't ride to work for logistical reasons of clothing or time constraints until their fitness and skills are also up to speed. The OBVIOUS way to get commuters out of their cars and on to bicycles is to bridge the gap between the newbie's legs and the veterans legs. These people are turning to bicycles and away from cars for their commute. What they can't do yet is make the 30km journey in less than 2 hours (each way), arrive at work in time for a shower (if they're lucky enough to have such facilities) and leave for work an hour or an hour and a half earlier than they normally do. They need help and that help is in the form of an efficient e-bike.

I weigh 93kg and I can ride the 72km return journey to work with my legs alone and I'll zoom past you on your hybrid commuter bicycle with the one pannier bag and suck the fluoro vest off your back in my wake without so much as a ding from my non-existant bell. Am I a menace to society too or am I excempt because I can do this under my own power? I'd be happy for SteveAndBelle to join me on my commute and I would recommend that he gets a 350W cyclone motor to help him keep up. In time he'll get fitter, lighter and faster under his own steam... well he would have if it wasn't for the cyclo-elite demonstrating what wanchors we cyclists are. No wonder he went back to the car. Good job everyone.

So what end does yet another thread on the same topic serve? None that I can see.

What makes me really laugh are the comments on 'illegality'.

Well, the OP acknowledged him/herself the "illegality" in their very first words.

No wonder he went back to the car. Good job everyone.

So why is that a problem? S/he simply said

I've scrapped the project now and will continue to use my car.

Nowhere has there been any indication that s/he (a) ever stopped using their or car or (b) is never going to ride a bicycle ever again for all of eternity.

I've got 5 pedallies, only two of which are electric, but I ride all of them at some time or other, but still average about 9,000 km a year on my petrol powered pony. I can't see why not having an "illegal" machine should be a reason for not riding a bicycle at all. That would sound rather like a dummy spit.

I think you're making a mountain out of a non-existent molehill.

Joe

To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracyBertrand RussellMany people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.

Hangdog98 wrote:I think the best place for a question like this is on the electric bike forums at http://www.endless-sphere.com because there's far too many self righteous wanchors here who take pride in their place at the middle of the human powered totem pole.

What makes me really laugh are the comments on 'illegality'. How many of the pious pedallers here have reflectors on their wheels? How many have refelctors on their pedals, or a white reflector on the front of their bike and a red one on the rear,? How many use the appropriate hand signals when changing lanes or diverging? How many discard their helmet when it has reached its use-by-date? How many have a bell fitted to their bike? How many ride no more than two abreast on the road? How many have their front brake lever on the left? How many are over 93kgs (most of the 6'3"+ riders would be) and finally how many have ridden at speeds above 47.5 kph using the assistance of a tailwind, a slipstream, a hill or a Guarana energy gel?

A: about 95% of us. (Hypocrite much?). Are you a menace to society too or did you earn the right to be so pious by cycling to work in the rain when others took the car?

Talk about an elitist buch of hypocrite wanchors who cherry pick the laws they follow. Even so, these aren't the laws allegedly found by Moses etched into the stone tablets, they're usually ill conceived scribble made by people who won a popularity contest by lying and cheating and who have no idea what they're talking about in the first place. That's why you took the dodgy reflectors off your clipless pedals isn't it. Yes, hang your heads in shame and report to your local Police Station forthwith.

Cycling is a growing sport and most, if not all of the newer members of the cycling community can't match your V02 and can't ride to work for logistical reasons of clothing or time constraints until their fitness and skills are also up to speed. The OBVIOUS way to get commuters out of their cars and on to bicycles is to bridge the gap between the newbie's legs and the veterans legs. These people are turning to bicycles and away from cars for their commute. What they can't do yet is make the 30km journey in less than 2 hours (each way), arrive at work in time for a shower (if they're lucky enough to have such facilities) and leave for work an hour or an hour and a half earlier than they normally do. They need help and that help is in the form of an efficient e-bike.

I weigh 93kg and I can ride the 72km return journey to work with my legs alone and I'll zoom past you on your hybrid commuter bicycle with the one pannier bag and suck the fluoro vest off your back in my wake without so much as a ding from my non-existant bell. Am I a menace to society too or am I excempt because I can do this under my own power? I'd be happy for SteveAndBelle to join me on my commute and I would recommend that he gets a 350W cyclone motor to help him keep up. In time he'll get fitter, lighter and faster under his own steam... well he would have if it wasn't for the cyclo-elite demonstrating what wanchors we cyclists are. No wonder he went back to the car. Good job everyone.

Well I'm pretty sure you are the goose, mate. In queensland the only stipulation as to the legality of a non powered push bike is...

QLD ROAD RULES wrote:Equipment on a bicycle (s258)

Your bicycle must:

have at least one effective brakehave a bell, horn or similar warning device in working order.Riding at night (s259)

When riding at night, or in weather conditions with reduced visibility, you must display on your bicycle or yourself:

a flashing or steady white light on the front of the bicycle that can be seen for at least 200 ma flashing or steady red light on the rear of the bicycle that can be seen for at least 200 ma reflector on the rear of the bicycle that can be seen for at least 50 m when a vehicle's headlights shine on it.

I can tell you with complete honesty that all my bikes comply with all of these rules and are completely legal. Also, I ride on average about 1100-1200 k on my bikes a month. I commute, I ride places etc. Yes, sometimes I even ride in the rain although usually only to get to or from work, or to pick my kids up from school.

I also take my safety reasonably seriously. If my objection to sharing our tiny little cycle paths and routes with a bicycle and passenger unit likely weighing 13-150kg not pedalling but doing 47kph makes me a "self righteous wanchors/Hypocrite/cyclo-elite wanchors" then so be it.

I love it when Queenslanders make comments about technical things.And you're worried sick about some dubious Wattage output that the Police will never be able to calculate, let alone enforce.

Here's some more things to consider when you're busy claiming not to be breaking any rules and throwing stones in your glass house:

**************************************

Riding two abreast, no more than 1.5 m apart

Travelling to the front of a line of traffic on the left hand side of the stopped vehicles

Travelling in Bus Lanes and Transit Lanes. However, cyclists cannot travel in Bus Only Lanes

Travelling on the footpath where indicated by signage

Cycling on the footpath if the cyclist is less than 12 years old. An adult, who is riding in a supervisory capacity of a cyclist less than 12 years old, may also ride with the young cyclist on the footpath

Turning right from the left hand lane of a multi-lane roundabout with the proviso the cyclists must give way to exiting trafficTo be a legal road vehicle during the day, a bicycle must have:

At least one working brake

Either a bell or horn fitted to the bike, within easy reach and in working orderTo be a legal road vehicle at night, a bicycle must also have :

Lights fitted and in use when riding at night - a steady or flashing white light that is clearly visible for at least 200 metres and a flashing or steady red light that is clearly visible for at least 200 metres from the rear of the bike

red rear reflector that is clearly visible for 50 metres when light is projected onto it by a vehicle's headlight on low beamIt is compulsory to wear an approved helmet correctly when riding a bike. This applies to all cyclists, regardless of age, including children on bicycles with training wheels and any child being carried as a passenger on a bike or in a trailer.

The fine for any bicycle offence is $45.

Part 15 Additional rules for bicycle riders

Note 1 This Part contains rules that apply only to bicycle riders. Most rulesin the Australian Road Rules apply to bicycle riders in the same way as theyapply to drivers â€” see rule 19. There are some other rules that are forbicycle riders only, or that have exceptions for bicycle riders. These include:

optional hook turn by bicycle riders â€” rule 35

bicycle riders making a hook turn contrary to a no hook turn by bicycles sign â€” rule 36

stopping on a road with a bicycle parking sign â€” rule 201.Note 2 Bicycle is defined in the dictionary.

245 Riding a bicycle

The rider of a bicycle must:(a) sit astride the riderâ€™s seat facing forwards (except if thebicycle is not built to be ridden astride); and(b) ride with at least 1 hand on the handlebars; and(c) if the bicycle is equipped with a seat â€” not ride thebicycle seated in any other position on the bicycle.Offence provision.

246 Carrying people on a bicycle

The rider of a bicycle must not carry more persons on thebicycle than the bicycle is designed to carry.Offence provision.Additional rules for bicycle riders Part 15

247 Riding in a bicycle lane on a road

(1) The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicyclelane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction asthe rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticableto do so.Offence provision.Note Rule 153 defines a bicycle lane and deals with the use of bicyclelanes by other vehicles.(2) In this rule:road does not include a road-related area.Note Road-related area includes the shoulder of a road â€” see rule 13.

248 No riding across a road on a crossing

The rider of a bicycle must not ride across a road, or part of aroad, on a childrenâ€™s crossing, marked foot crossing orpedestrian crossing.Offence provision.Note Childrenâ€™s crossing is defined in rule 80, marked foot crossing isdefined in the dictionary, and pedestrian crossing is defined in rule 81.

249 Riding on a separated footpath

The rider of a bicycle must not ride on a part of a separatedfootpath designated for the use of pedestrians.Offence provision.Note 1 Separated footpath is defined in rule 239, and pedestrian is definedin rule 18.Note 2 Rule 336 deals with how parts of a separated footpath aredesignated for bicycle riders and pedestrians.

250 Riding on a footpath or shared path

(1) The rider of a bicycle who is 12 years old or older must not rideon a footpath if another law of this jurisdiction prohibits therider from riding on the footpath.Offence provision.Example of another law of this jurisdictionAnother law of this jurisdiction may provide that a commercial courier mustnot ride a bicycle on any footpath or any footpath in a particular area, or thatan adult must not ride a bicycle on a footpath unless the adult isaccompanying a child under 12 years who is also riding on the footpath.Note Footpath is defined in the dictionary.(2) The rider of a bicycle riding on a footpath or shared path must:(a) keep to the left of the footpath or shared path unless it isimpracticable to do so; and(b) give way to any pedestrian on the footpath or shared path.Offence provision.Note 1 Pedestrian is defined in rule 18, and shared path is defined inrule 242.Note 2 For subrule (2), give way means the rider must slow down and, ifnecessary, stop to avoid a collision â€” see the definition in the dictionary.(3) In this rule:footpath does not include a separated footpath.Note Separated footpath is defined in rule 239.

251 Riding to the left of oncoming bicycle riders on a path

The rider of a bicycle riding on a bicycle path, footpath,separated footpath or shared path must keep to the left of anyoncoming bicycle rider on the path.Offence provision.Note Bicycle path and separated footpath are defined in rule 239, footpathis defined in the dictionary, and shared path is defined in rule 242.Additional rules for bicycle riders Part 15

252 No bicycles signs and markings

(1) The rider of a bicycle must not ride on a length of road orfootpath to which a no bicycles sign, or a no bicycles roadmarking, applies.Offence provision.Note Footpath, length of road and no bicycles road marking are definedin the dictionary.(2) A no bicycles sign, or a no bicycles road marking, applies to alength of road or footpath beginning at the sign or marking andending at the nearest of the following:(a) a bicycle path sign or bicycle path road marking;(b) a bicycle lane sign;(c) a separated footpath sign or separated footpath roadmarking;(d) a shared path sign;(e) an end no bicycles sign;(f) the next intersection.Note Intersection is defined in the dictionary, and bicycle path roadmarking and separated footpath road marking are defined in rule 239.No bicycles sign Bicycle path signBicycle lane sign Separated footpath signPart 15 Additional rules for bicycle ridersNote 1 for diagrams There are a number of other permitted versions of thebicycle path sign and bicycle lane sign, and another permitted version of theno bicycles sign, separated footpath sign and shared path sign â€” see thediagrams in Schedule 3.Note 2 for diagrams A separated footpath sign may have the pedestriansymbol and the bicycle symbol reversed â€” see rule 316 (4).

253 Bicycle riders not to cause a traffic hazard

The rider of a bicycle must not cause a traffic hazard bymoving into the path of a driver or pedestrian.Offence provision.

254 Bicycles being towed etc

(1) A person must not ride on a bicycle that is being towed byanother vehicle.Offence provision.Note Vehicle is defined in rule 15.(2) The rider of a bicycle must not hold onto another vehicle whilethe vehicle is moving.Offence provision.

255 Riding too close to the rear of a motor vehicle

The rider of a bicycle must not ride within 2 metres of the rearof a moving motor vehicle continuously for more than200 metres.Offence provision.Note Motor vehicle is defined in the dictionary.

256 Bicycle helmets

(1) The rider of a bicycle must wear an approved bicycle helmetsecurely fitted and fastened on the riderâ€™s head, unless the rideris exempt from wearing a bicycle helmet under another law ofthis jurisdiction.Offence provision.Note Approved bicycle helmet is defined in the dictionary.(2) The rider of a bicycle must not carry a passenger on the bicycleunless:(a) the passenger is wearing an approved bicycle helmetsecurely fitted and fastened on the passengerâ€™s head; or(b) the passenger is exempt from wearing a bicycle helmetunder another law of this jurisdiction.Offence provision.(3) Subrule (2) does not apply to the rider of a three orfour-wheeled bicycle who is carrying a paying passenger.

257 Riding with a person on a bicycle trailer

(1) The rider of a bicycle must not tow a bicycle trailer with aperson in or on the bicycle trailer, unless:(a) the rider is 16 years old, or older; and(b) the person in or on the bicycle trailer is under 10 years old,or as otherwise provided under another law of thisjurisdiction; and(c) the bicycle trailer can safely carry the person; and(d) the person in or on the bicycle trailer is wearing anapproved bicycle helmet securely fitted and fastened onthe personâ€™s head, unless the person is exempt fromwearing a bicycle helmet under another law of thisjurisdiction.Offence provision.Note Approved bicycle helmet is defined in the dictionary.(2) In this rule:bicycle trailer means a vehicle that is built to be towed, or istowed, by a bicycle.Note Vehicle is defined in rule 15.

258 Equipment on a bicycle

A person must not ride a bicycle that does not have:(a) at least 1 effective brake; and(b) a bell, horn, or similar warning device, in working order.Offence provision.

259 Riding at night

The rider of a bicycle must not ride at night, or in hazardousweather conditions causing reduced visibility, unless thebicycle, or the rider, displays:(a) a flashing or steady white light that is clearly visible for atleast 200 metres from the front of the bicycle; and(b) a flashing or steady red light that is clearly visible for atleast 200 metres from the rear of the bicycle; and(c) a red reflector that is clearly visible for at least 50 metresfrom the rear of the bicycle when light is projected onto itby a vehicleâ€™s headlight on low-beam.Offence provision.Note Low-beam and night are defined in the dictionary.

(1) The rider of a bicycle approaching bicycle crossing lightsshowing a yellow bicycle crossing light must comply with thisrule.Offence provision.Note Bicycle crossing lights and yellow bicycle crossing light are definedin the dictionary.(2) If the rider can stop safely before reaching the bicycle crossinglights, the bicycle rider must stop before reaching the lights.(3) If the rider stops before reaching the bicycle crossing lights,and the lights change to red, the bicycle rider must not proceeduntil:(a) the bicycle crossing lights change to green; or(b) there is no red or yellow bicycle crossing light showing.Note Green bicycle crossing light and red bicycle crossing light aredefined in the dictionary.Yellow bicycle crossing light

262 Proceeding when bicycle crossing lights change to yellow or red

(1) If bicycle crossing lights at an intersection change from greento yellow or red while the rider of a bicycle is in theintersection, the rider must finish crossing the intersection assoon as the rider can do so safely.Offence provision.Note 1 Bicycle crossing lights is defined in the dictionary.Note 2 Intersection does not include a road-related area â€” see thedefinition in the dictionary.(2) If bicycle crossing lights at a place on a road where the rider ofa bicycle is crossing the road change from green to yellow orred while the rider is on the road, the rider must cross the roadas soon as the rider can do so safely.Offence provision.(3) In this rule:road does not include a road-related area.

As I've mentioned, the problem is very clearly and simply stated. The OP has stated s/he wants to know how to do something which s/he acknowledges is illegal.

What that "something" is ... is of absolutely no relevance.

What s/he is doing is in no way different from all the "illegalities" you allege other people (who??) are doing.

A: about 95% of us. (Hypocrite much?).

You've said "us", which therefore includes yourself. You've admitted you've committed illegal acts, so what are you arguing about?

Joe

To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracyBertrand RussellMany people feel their lifestyle has a high price, but they're quite cool with that .. as long as somebody ELSE pays the price.

I could link to the rules section too if that makes it better for you???

Anyway, the problem remains - We've got a guy here who has an unregistered electric motorbike who is intending to ride it illegally on paths intended for bicycles or pedestrians. So, we will have a 130-150kg lump doing 50kph down our tiny and inadequate bike paths. I will say it again - if I saw this happening I'll report it.

If I'm doing something wrong you're welcome to report it. I'm pretty sure they will take my report of a electric motorbike doing an estimated 50kph down Kedron Brook Bikeway more seriously than yours. That could be on an absolute scale though.

I guess the thing that the OP and Handog has to live with is that whatever alleged infractions your fellow bicycle users may or may not commit - if there is an accident the police will have your bike sitting there in front of them. Like say the OP nails some poor kid at 50kph on a bike path and does grave injuries to both of them then the police will have a beast of a bike wreck in front of them with a huge motor and a very large battery. They will likely have a whitness or two saying "he wasn't even pedalling". I mean you work it out. There is going to be trouble. It's like a car crash where the vehicle involved is unroadworthy... like you're starting out on the wrong foot! Is it worth it?